Letters - 31 March 2023

From Migration to Scruffy Quakers

Migration

The current row over Gary Lineker’s comments on Twitter concerning home secretary Suella Braverman’s language about asylum seekers runs the risk of distracting us from the latter, and from the intentions of the government regarding policy on asylum in the UK.

It is the opinion of Crawshawbooth Quakers that the language used by Suella Braverman and colleagues (saying that the people who arrive on boats are illegal and an invasion and that they are taking advantage of us) could be quite dangerous in encouraging or condoning racism among some British citizens.

Wouldn’t it be good if our government instead was encouraging a welcoming, tolerant, more generous, more equal and less judgemental society?

Wouldn’t anyone, even if not persecuted, be tempted to try to move to another country if they thought it would improve their standard of living?

After all, a lot of British people emigrate in search of a better life.

Instead of seeing immigrants and/or asylum seekers as in competition for jobs, wealth, housing and so on, if we had different economic and welfare policies, there could be enough for everyone to have a decent quality of life and standard of living.

People from overseas often enrich our country in all sorts of ways and, with an ageing population, what’s not to like about having more young people?

Sue Eveleigh

Young Friends at YM

As the registration period for Yearly Meeting (YM) comes to a close, I’ve been disappointed to note the bookings page’s patronising attitude towards under-eighteens attending: they must be booked onto a euphemistic ‘age-appropriate’ (predominantly not in-session YM) programme.

Some children and young people are full members, as expressly permitted in Quaker faith & practice 11.13; the constitution of YM (6.12) states that ‘All members of the yearly meeting have the right to attend and to take part in its deliberations’.

I fear this policy is both contradictory governance and against our Testimony to Equality.

I attended YM at seventeen and found being involved in national discernment informative and spiritually grounding.

In correspondence with Friends House, it appears this youth prohibition actually operates on a flexible case-by-case basis.

I still believe this policy is wrong, though if it is in force, the website should detail this explicitly for truth’s sake.

We ought not complain about young people not being involved in the Society when we actively exclude them; it seems we need discernment to clarify the place of young Friends in Meetings for Worship for Business.

I also imagine the Charity Commission would prefer if Britain Yearly Meeting stuck to its, already very terse, constitution.

Robert Rayner

You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.